Athlon X4 830 vs PRO A10-8770E

Athlon X4 830 vs PRO A10-8770E Performance Spectrum

Athlon X4 830

4 / 4

3,018

+0.6%

Ryzen Threadripper 1950

Ryzen AI Max 390

Ryzen 9 9955HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

PRO A10-8770E

4 / 4

3,001

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 1920

Ryzen AI Max 390

Ryzen 9 9955HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Athlon X4 830 vs PRO A10-8770E FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Athlon X4 830 vs PRO A10-8770E: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Athlon X4 830

2015

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $325 less on MSRP ($70 MSRP vs $395 MSRP).
✅Delivers 467.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 43.1 vs 7.6 PassMark/$ ($70 MSRP vs $395 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

PRO A10-8770E

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,001 vs 3,018).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 7.6 vs 43.1 PassMark/$ ($395 MSRP vs $70 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is PRO A10-8770E better than Athlon X4 830?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, PRO A10-8770E is ahead with a 1.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Athlon X4 830 pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon X4 830 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

PRO A10-8770E is still the much better call for a fresh build. PRO A10-8770E comes in 464.3% more expensive on MSRP at $395 MSRP versus $70 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon X4 830 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2015 platform. Even with 467.5% better value on paper (43.1 vs 7.6 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on FM2+.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

PRO A10-8770E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2015). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon X4 830 vs PRO A10-8770E Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Athlon X4 830

The Athlon X4 830 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FM2+. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 3,018 points. Launch price was $149.

PRO A10-8770E

The PRO A10-8770E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Outubro 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Carrizo (2015−2018) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,001 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon X4 830 and PRO A10-8770E share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the Athlon X4 830 versus 3.5 GHz on the PRO A10-8770E — a 2.9% clock advantage for the PRO A10-8770E (base: 3 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Athlon X4 830 uses the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture (28 nm), while the PRO A10-8770E uses Carrizo (2015−2018) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon X4 830 scores 3,018 against the PRO A10-8770E's 3,001 — a 0.6% lead for the Athlon X4 830.

Feature	Athlon X4 830	PRO A10-8770E
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz	3.5 GHz+3%
Base Clock	3 GHz+7%	2.8 GHz
L2 Cache	4 MB+100%	2048 kB
Process	28 nm	28 nm
Architecture	Kaveri (2014−2015)	Carrizo (2015−2018)
PassMark	3,018	3,001

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon X4 830 uses the FM2+ socket (PCIe 3.0), while the PRO A10-8770E uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon X4 830	PRO A10-8770E
Socket	FM2+	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-2133	—
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon X4 830 was priced at $70, while the PRO A10-8770E came in at $395. On launch pricing ($70 vs $395), Athlon X4 830 was $325 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon X4 830 delivers 43.1 pts/$ vs 7.6 pts/$ for the PRO A10-8770E — making the Athlon X4 830 the 140.1% better value option.

Feature	Athlon X4 830	PRO A10-8770E
MSRP	$70-82%	$395
Performance per Dollar	43.1+467%	7.6
Release Date	2015	2016

Search Athlon X4 830 on Amazon

Search PRO A10-8770E on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.